A01: Outline the features of the Working Memory Model

The working memory model was proposed by Baddeley & Hitch (1974) as an alternative to the multi-store model of memory. It has been developed to directly challenge the concept of a single unitary store for short-term memories. The working memory model is based upon the findings of the dual-task study and suggests that there are four separate components to our working memory (STM). The most important component is the central executive; it is involved in problem solving/decision-making. It also controls attention and plays a major role in planning and synthesizing information, not only from the subsidiary systems but also from LTM. It is flexible and can process information from any modality, although it does have a limited storage capacity and so can attend to a limited number if things at one time.

Another part of the working memory model is the phonological loop, it stores a limited number of speech-based sounds for brief periods. It is thought to consist of two components - the phonological store (inner ear) that allows acoustically coded items to be stored for a brief period and the articulatory control process (the inner voice) that allows sub-vocal repetition of the items stored in the phonological store. Another important component is the visuo-spatial scratch pad; it stores visual and spatial information and can be thought of as an inner eye. It is responsible for setting up and manipulating mental images. Like the phonological loop, it has limited capacity but the limits of the two systems are independent. In other words, it is possible, for example, to rehearse a set of digits in the phonological loop while simultaneously making decisions about the spatial layout of a set of letters in the visual spatial scratchpad.

Finally in 2000 Baddeley proposed an additional component, the episodic buffer. It is responsible for integrating & manipulating material; it has limited capacity and depends heavily on executive processing. It binds together information from different sources into chunks or episodes, hence the term ‘episodic’. One of its important functions is to recall material from LTM & integrate it into STM when working memory requires it (e.g. imagining an elephant ice-skating).

One strength of the WMM is that there is evidence to support the phonological loop.

Baddeley (1975) word length effect (short words easier to recall than long). Prevention from being able to rehearse words by repeating an irrelevant sound. The word length effect was lost as articulatory suppression fills the phonological loop.

A second strength of the WMM is that there is evidence to support the visuo-spatial scratch pad. Baddeley (1973) PPts hold a pointer with a moving spot of light whilst visualising the block capital letter F. Tracking and letter imagery tasks were competing for the limited resources of the visuo-spatial scratch pad. Where as the tracking and verbal tasks use separate components.

One weakness of the working memory model is that the Central Executive is difficult to quantify. Little research has been done to understand the central executive.Nobody knows the capacity limitations of the central executive? Richardson (1984) Problems specifying the precise function of the central executive. It cannot be falsified.

A second weakness of the WMM is that the research is lab based.whilst this in itself is not a problem, there is the possibility of lack of ecological validity, especially the artificial setting. However, the model could be argued to have mundane realism since the tasks given to participants COULD potentially represent experienced in daily life (e.g. riding your bike & listening to your ipod).

Robbins (1996) Chess players.Aim:To study the role of the Central Executive in remembering chess positions by investigating the effect of generating random letter strings.

Procedure:20 chess players- given 10 seconds to remember the position of 16 pieces from a chess game.When memorizing participants either:1. used the central executive by generating random number sequences while avoiding meaningful combinations (H, G, P)or2. carried out articulatory suppression task ( said 'the, the, the' in time with a metronome)After 10 seconds, memory was tested as ppts were asked to arrange the pieces as they first memorized them.

Findings:The letter generation = poor memory and performance.Thearticulatorysuppressiontask=goodmemoryandperformance.Conclusions: The central executive not the phonological loop plays a role in remembering chess positions.A02:The design of the controlled experiment allows the researcher to claim cause and effect. This mean that we can say that the letter generation task causes poor memory recall.Randomly generating letter sequences are a valid way of engaging the central executive.Further conditions have shown that the visuo-spatial scratchpad is used in recalling chess positions.